General Notes

1  NAME Arcadius Emperor of /Constantinople/ 1  BIRT 2  DATE APR 401


Introduction and Early Life the ineffectual life and reign ofFlaviusArcadius are of consider ably less importance than the quitesignificantdevelopments that occurred during his reign. B orn either in377 or 378 tothen general Theodosius and Aelia Flavia Flacilla, he andhis youn gerbrother, Honorius, ruled the eastern and western halves ofthe RomanEmpire respectively fr om 395.

Shortly after his birth, his father was raised to the imperial purplein379. Events in Illyri cum with the massive influx of OstrogothicandVisigothic peoples had resulted in the defeat o f the Roman army andthedeath of the emperor, Valens. Theodosius' first task was to confron ttheVisigoths who had been ravaging the Balkans. Perhaps in the wake ofthisdifficult and al most insurmountable task, the emperor wanted toinsurethat his infant son would bear some leg itimacy should he die oncampaign.Whatever the reason, Arcadius was proclaimed Augustus in January of 383at the age of five or six. In the following year, his youngerbrother wasborn an d it seems as if Theodosius initially had beeninterested inpreserving the theoretical positi on of his elder son. WhileArcadiusenjoyed the status of Augustus, Honorius only achieved th eoffice ofconsul posterior in 386. Perhaps the eastern emperor had wantedto avoidthe possib le conflicts that arose earlier in the century withthe familyof Constantine. Recent events i n the west with theassassination ofGratian by Magnus Maximus may have also played a part: Theodosiusinitially had to leave the murder of his imperial colleagueunavenged andleave the bo y- emperor, Valentinian II, largely undefended.the profusionof emperors may well have been s een by Theodosius askindling for civilwar. His own autocratic tendencies may have also mean tthat he saw onlyone possible successor for himself.

Nevertheless, Theodosius gave Arcadius very little independence inearlylife. When he went t o campaign against Magnus in the late 380's,heplaced his son under the Praetorian Prefect o f the East, Tatian, whowasthe de facto emperor in Theodosius' absence. This began a long ser iesofregencies for Arcadius. the strength of Tatian's position withtheeastern governing cla ss made the office of Praetorian Prefect allthemore powerful in Constantinople, which in tur n made it easier todominatefuture emperors. When Theodosius replaced Tatian with the more malleableand more ambitious Rufinus in 392, he had appointed a minister whowouldcentralize eve n greater authority under the prefecture.

By 393, the emperor's situation had changed radically. When events inthewest demanded his at tention again, Theodosius was in a muchstrongerposition. the ascendancy of the general, Arbo gast, and his ownpuppetemperor, Eugenius, in the west provided Theodosius an opportunityand ,indeed, the obligation to take full control of the Empire. thechance forhaving his own tw o sons ruling both halves of Rome not onlyseemedpractical and feasible, but such an arrangem ent would establishhimselfas the head of a new dynasty. With thoughts in that direction, Honoriuswas mad'Augustus in 393 and accompanied his father west in thesummer of394. Arcadius , although near his majority, was neverthelessplaced againunder the guardianship (epitropos ) of the Prefect of theEast. In Januaryof 395, Theodosius the Great died and his two sons to oktheoreticalcontrol of the two halves of the Roman Empire.

Early Reign and the Dominance of Rufinus and Eutropius (395-399)Arcadiuswas eighteen when h e assumed the throne in the east. We do notknowwhether or not he was ready for the responsib ilities. Duringthemid-380's, the young emperor had been educated in part by Themistius,afam ous pagan statesman, philosopher, and speaker. In what way heaffectedArcadius is impossibl e to say, but surely his teachings musthaveincluded statecraft. Perhaps because of this infl uence, the newemperor'sattempt to establish himself as an independent force can be seenin a series of laws passed at his accession. In contrast to trying tocreate amilitary image for h imself, which would not be allowed either byRufinusor by the eastern court, he attempted t o portray himself as apiousChristian emperor. He enacted several comprehensive laws agains theresyand paganism.

This was not necessarily an ineffectual strategy. By celebratinghisreligious piety, he expre ssed his power in the only way available toanemperor largely controlled by his ministers. H e also perhaps soughttogain support and power from the local governing and religious hierarchiesin Constantinople. Arcadius also perhaps thought that he was carryingonin the traditio n of his father and so, by extension, might share insomeof his glory. Rufinus in contrast wa nted to tie himself to theemperorthrough a marriage connection to his daughter. But in Apri l of395,Arcadius had taken advantage of the Prefect's temporary absence tomarryAelia Eudoxi a, whose guardian, the general, Promotus, had been abitterenemy of Rufinus. Arcadius had bee n aided in this move by his owngrandchamberlain (praepositus sacri cubiculi), Eutropius, an d itperhapsindicated the degree to which he wanted to be free of any regent.

But in reality, Arcadius gained little if any power. Rufinus assumedfullcontrol of the east , and the Vandal Stilicho, Theodosius' closestadvisorand general, took control of Honorius i n the west. the tensionbetweeneast and west quickly grew when Stilicho, in command of all th eeasternand western armies, tried to press his guardianship over Arcadiusaswell. Moreover , there was considerable resentment against Rufinus intheeast for using his office to greatl y enrich himself and perhaps,too,because he was a westerner. Rufinus, understanding the peri ls aroundhim,acted quickly. He had Arcadius demand the return of the easternarmies atonce . Stilicho acquiesced, perhaps because the general wasbasing hisclaim of guardianship on hi s own legitimacy: to have takencontrol of theeast and Arcadius by force would have undermine d hisposition there andperhaps in the west. the soldiers returned under thecommand of theGo thic general, Gainas. With the control of the fieldarmy, it seemed asif Rufinus was going t o be more thoroughly in controlof the east andover Arcadius.

He did not long enjoy his victory. When Arcadius and Rufinus came togreetthe armies at Hebdo man near Constantinople in November of 395,thesoldiers turned on the Praetorian Prefect an d cut him down in frontofthe emperor. Whether Stilicho instigated the assassination is a mat terofsome debate, but if he did, he received no benefit from it. thearmiesremained and Arca dius soon fell under the sway of otherministers.Nevertheless, despite the shock and fear Arc adius may havefelt atwitnessing such a brutal murder, he probably missed Rufinus'presence n otat all and even thought it might provide an opportunity toassert his ownauthority. For th e bureaucracy, the death meant thatmaintaining civiliancontrol over the army was paramount t o their ownsurvival.

Soon thereafter, Eutropius assumed Rufinus' place in dominatingArcadius.Since the grand cham berlain could control access to the emperorandcommanded the powerful palace bureaucracy, h e was well-placed todictatewhat and whom the emperor saw and heard. Military officers--frequentlyGermanic--who dominated the western government, were held suspectbyfearful and jealou s civil administrators in Constantinople.Eutropiusused that fear to his advantage and froz e out any access theymay havehad to the circles of power. His decision to effectively eliminate themilitary's input in decision-making would eventually lead to hisdemise.

It is difficult to determine how popular Eutropius was eitherwithArcadius or with the wide r population. As a eunuch and a formerslave,the sources generally portray him very negativel y. He neverthelessseemsto have enjoyed some support from the emperor, likely aided byEudoxi awith whom the grand chamberlain had close ties. the emperorhappily tookannual vacations i n Galatia, apparently upon the Eutropius'suggestion.Moreover, the chamberlain showed great p ersonal courage andtalent inleading a campaign against invading Huns in 397/8, for which h ewon theconsulship and the rank of patrician in the following year of 399.Healso seems to h ave gained considerable support from the local clergybyprocuring the patriarchate of Constan tinople in 398 for JohnChrysostom.

Despite Eutropius' rise to power, however, eastern policy changedlittle.the religious polici es of Theodosius and Arcadius continued,includingthe forced closure of pagan temples in Gaza . Moresignificantly, tensionbetween the two halves of the empire persisted asStilicho conti nued topress for his position as guardian. AlthoughStilicho led periodic raidsinto Greece an d Thrace to attack the newVisigothic king, Alaric, hisvictories were incomplete and were mor elikely meant to keep the Germanicpeople out of western territory. Thismeant, among other t hings, that theVisigoths were an enduring problemfor the east. Eutropius in turnsupported th e revolt of the Count Gildoin Africa, which was underwestern control, in an attempt to desta bilizeStilicho's control andfurther eastern domains.

the failure of the revolt in 398 was the first step inEutropius'downfall. the decision to ex clude the military men of theperiod,particularly among the growing importance of Germanic of ficers,created adangerous situation. By 399, the dissatisfaction with east-westaffairsand t he Gildo fiasco resulted in a revolt by the Gothic count,Tribigild.He was apparently in coll usion with Gainas, who had takenadvantage ofthe crisis to be named chief general in the eas t (magisterutriusquemilitiae). Gainas quickly reached an agreement with the rebeland part o fthe settlement was the dismissal of Eutropius, to whichArcadius--atEudoxia's urging--agreed . the chamberlain took refuge in theHagiaSophia, and was exiled to Cyprus. But shortly there after, in theautumnof 399, Eutropius was recalled, tried and executed in Chalcedon.

the Age of Eudoxia (400-404) the death of Eutropius precipitated aseriouscrisis. Gainas, wh o had wanted high office for years, now triedto forcethe hand of Arcadius. Having come t o a quick resolution withTribigild,he moved from Thrace towards Constantinople in 400. Wit h theGermanictroops supporting him, Gainas tried for six months to initiatehis ownprimacy- - including seizing the imperial palace--but whichfailed. He wasforced to withdraw personall y from the city to regroup andplanned to usehis troops remaining there to seize the entire c ity. Butthey wereslaughtered by the inhabitiants and he fled first to Thrace andthen toAsia . Eventually Gainas was killed by the Huns later in thatyear. Hisattempted coup ensured tha t Germanic officers would never againbetrusted by the eastern government and would forever b e kept out ofanyimportant decision-making roles.

the likely successor to Eutropius had been the anti-Germanicleader,Aurelianus, who had succe eded to the Prefecture of the East in399. ButGainas had exiled him, having forced Arcadius t o hand him over,andalthough Aurelianus returned triumphantly after Gainas' departure,heappe ars to have lost his hold over the emperor. In the meantime,AeliaEudoxia had done much to fo rward her own place in the government.InJanuary of 400, she had been named Augusta, a singul ardistinctionoffered to only three other women in the previous century. Herpositionthus gai ned a semi-official legitimacy afforded to very fewRomanempresses. It has been assumed tha t because of her beauty,herintelligence, and her fecundity (she bore Arcadius five children) ,shewas able to assert her influence to a point where she was the newpowerbehind the throne .

That assessment, while held by many scholars, is not entirelyaccurate.While there were sever al events in which she played a crucialpart, theywere not terribly important moments durin g Arcadius' reign.But becauseEudoxia was enormously wealthy, because she delivered a malehe ir in 401,and because she was involved in a highly publicized anddrawn outpolitical fight wi th John Chrysostom, this belief that therewas anassumption of power is based more on the not oriety of her actsthan onactual control. the fact that there was no one clearly dominatingt hegovernment nor the emperor during this time implies perhaps thatArcadiushad more power dur ing these five years of his reign than at anyothertime.

There are several indications that he did try to improve and asserthisown position. the empe ror and his court immediately came tosomeunderstanding with the west. the east at the very l east gaveHonorius andStilicho moral support in their increasing problems withAlaric. In 402 ,the feeling of goodwill was sealed by a joint consulshipbetween Arcadiusand his brother. Th e emperor also sought to establishhis own militaryprowess and Christian piety with the erect ion of acolumn set up in theHippodrome of Constantinople in 402/3. the columndepicted his m ilitaryvictory over Gainas, crowned with a capitalemblazoned with the Greekletters chi-rho , symbolizing his devotion toChrist. Arcadius' son,Theodosius II, was born in 401, and was q uicklymad'Augustus at the ageof eight months. the eastern ruler was thusinterested in assu ring hisown dynasty.

In all these things, the emperor was largely successful, but theywerelargely overshadowed b y the feud between his empress and the bishopofConstantinople. Eudoxia had already shown her self able in pushingherinterests during the baptism of her son. the Bishop of Constantinople,however, was a much tougher opponent than her husband. John Chrysostom,astrong believer i n social justice, had boorishly attacked Eudoxiaandmany of her friends for the conspicuous l uxury in which they livedanddisplayed themselves. At the height of these attacks, John compa redtheempress to Jezebel. Eudoxia in turn used her considerable influencetoinflame hostilit y among the clergy against the bishop. WorkingthroughBishop Theophilus of Alexandria, in 40 3 Chrysostom was deposedand forcedinto exile at a Church council convened by the emperor (th eSynod of theOak at Chalcedon). However, there was soon such turmoil anduproar in theimperi al city that the bishop was recalled a few dayslater. But thepublic feuding between Eudoxi a and Chrysostom continueduntil at last shehad him banished again in 404, this time permanen tly.Among other things,it caused a breach between Arcadius and his brother,who had, with Po peInnocent I, tried to support Chrysostom.

Eudoxia's victory was short-lived, however. In October of 404, theAugustadied of a miscarria ge. Her death was seen by some as retributionfordismissing John. Whatever the reason, her en d also signaled acompleteretreat into the background by the emperor and no furtherinitiative sseem to have been pushed by the 27-year-old Augustus.

the Final Years: Anthemius and Death (404-408) the last years ofArcadius'reign were complete ly dominated by his Praetorian Prefect ofthe East,Anthemius. It was perhaps fitting that whe n the emperor seemsto havebeen most retiring, the most able and energetic of his highministe rscame to power. Anthemius worked hard to solve a series ofgovernmentalabuses, continue t o push for Christianization, and securethe east fromattack.

Anthemius first seems to have tried to reconcile with the west, so muchsothat there was a jo int consulship between Anthemius and Stilicho in405.This might have also been meant to symbo lize the Prefect's newdominance,however. Additionally, a number of new laws were passed,curt ailingpaganism, Judaism and heresy. He tried to make use of thecontinuingproblem of incomin g Germanic peoples to combat the Isauriantribes whichhad been plaguing Asia Minor since 403 . While it failed tohalt eithergroup's incursions, it was nevertheless a practical andintell igentstrategy. As a means of protecting the imperial capital,Anthemius alsostrengthened th e walls around Constantinople. Our recordsfor the lastyears of Arcadius' rule are quite spot ty, but the emperorhimself seemsto have completely vanished, even symbolically, from thepoli tical scene.

In May of 408, Flavius Arcadius died at the age of 31 of unknowncauses.Our only physical des cription of Arcadius is heavily influencedby thegenerally low regard in which he was held. T he emperor wassupposedlyshort, thin and dark-complected. A more kindly correspondentdescrib edhim as good-natured and temperate. His son succeeded himwithout anycontroversy and the gov ernment remained unchanged. Arcadiusthus left theworld much as he entered it: without much s ignificance andovershadowedby more powerful forces.

Assessment Despite the ineffectual nature of Arcadius and his rule,anumber of significant ch anges occurred during his stewardship oftheeastern empire. His inability to forcefully or a t leasteffectivelygovern meant that there were few consistent or long-rangegoals of hisadmi nistration. With the exception of trying to emphasizethe emperor'spiety, an important develo pment in the history of theByzantine monarchy,Arcadius and his ministers were for the most p artsimply reacting toevents.

the emperor became an even more remote figure to the general public.Evenin the capital cit y itself, he was rarely seen: we read in oneaccountthat people came running to see the emper or for the first timewhen hehappened to be praying in a local church. A series of "orientalizing"court practices no doubt continued in order to emphasize thesymbolicseparation of the e mperor from the rest of society. thehieratic, almostsemi- divine nature of the imperial pers on, also becamea feature of theeastern ruler.

Perhaps of greatest importance was the political and culturalsplitbetween east and west. Wit h the death of Theodosius, the two halvesofthe Roman Empire increasingly went their separat e ways. For themostpart, the west was thrown back upon its own resources, unable todealwit h the problems of the fifth century. the east proved more compactandmore resilient: it large ly weathered the political storms fromwithoutand within.

Moreover, Constantinople fully became the imperial capital of the east,aRoma nova. the emper or rarely left the city and the palaceofficialsbecame more influential than many of the mor e theoreticallyimportantministers outside the city. Constantinople was also madeanarchepisc opate and Chrysostom and others started to push strongly foritsprimacy in the east. Both pub lic and private building projectsbeautifiedand enlarged the city. Under Arcadius' reign, i t truly becamethe secondcity of the Roman Empire.

Finally, the hard stance against Germanic officers in Romangovernmentbecame a central featur e in the east. While the reasons forthisdevelopment were inspired largely out of fear and pe rhaps racism,theeastern Roman Empire did manage to avoid the largelydetrimentalsuccession o f Germanic generalissimos who controlled the westin thefifth century. It also encouraged th e eastern rulers in thefollowingcentury to take hard lines against other peoples, includin gtheIsaurians, the Huns and the Persians. Taken in all, the era ofArcadiuswas far more impo rtant than Arcadius himself. He perhaps had hisfather'spretensions, but none of the skills o r powers necessary to leavehis markon the Empire.

Sources and Bibliography There are a number of sources that treat theageof Arcadius. the his torians Zosimus (New History),Socrates(Ecclesiastical History) and Sozomon (Ecclesiastical H istory)offer themost complete accounts. Additionally, Bishop Synesius of Cyreneinletters an d other works (On the Kingship and On Providence)specificallyaddresses a number of the probl ems and issues going on inConstantinopleand the imperial court at that time. the letters an dhomilies of JohnChrysostom are also of enormous value and tell us moreabout the socialhist ory of the capital than any other source. Minoraccounts include theChronicon Paschale and th e Chronicle of MarcellinusComes. Severalimportant saints' lives, including the Life of Porph yry,provide valuableinformation about events outside the capital. Finally,for the militarya nd political organization of the Roman Empire, theNotitia Dignitatumoffers a static look a t the early fifth century.

Cameron, Alan, and Long, Jacqueline (1993) Barbarians and Politics attheCourt of Arcadius (B erkeley).

Demougeot, Emilienne (1951), de l'unit©b Œ la division de l'empireromain,395-410: Essai su r la government imp©brial (Paris).

Holum, Kenneth (1982), Theodosian Empresses (Berkeley).

Jones, A.H.M. et al. (1970), the Prosopography of the Later RomanEmpire,vol. 1 (Cambridge).

Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G. (1991), Barbarians and Bishops. Army, Church,andState in the Age of A rcadius and Chrysostom (Oxford).

Martindale, J.R. (1980), the Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire,vol.2 (Cambridge).

Seeck, Otto (1896), "Arcadius," in RE, V. 2 (Berlin), 1137-53.

Van Ommeslaeghe, F. (1979) "Jean Chrysostome en conflitavecl'imp©bratrice Eudoxie," Analect a Bollandiana 97, 131-59.

Copyright (C) 1998, Geoffrey S. Nathan. This file may be copied onthecondition that the enti re contents, including the header andthiscopyright notice, remain intact.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Thanks for downloading information. Please contact me via email: nanzy@cox.net